Strong agreement with call.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, let's call it property.
To me, the more important question is 'what kind of property (if any)
is a domain name?'
That's the $64,000 question.
Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > Um, when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in which I practice
> > tells me that trademarks are not property, I listen, and I don't
> > much give a rip about what academia says.
>
> Cite?
>
> I don't really care whether the word "property" is attached to that
> particular form of "intellectual property" created under both Federal and
> State laws and which we call trade and service marks.
>
> All I care about is that whatever it is, I can license its use under
> conditions I dictate, I can invoke legal enforcement to keep others from
> using it, I can borrow money on its market value, and I can transfer my
> rights, whatever we call them, to another, and so forth.
>
> So, perhaps it isn't "property" but it has all the attributes that one
> normally associates with "property". So, for the sake of convenience, I
> believe, we can safely use the word "property" without any danger of
> leading anyone astray. ;-)
>
> --karl--
--
Dan Steinberg
SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin
Box 532, RR1 phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398
J0X 1N0 e-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
